Any argument based on observation or “a posteriori” knowledge is in fact or based upon inductive arguments, (the premises can never be certain even if the logical form is valid) So please stop high jacking philosophy to state your case, because your not very good at it. “Scientifically”… since your into that. Your skepticism doesn’t follow the scientific rule of parsimony(Occam’s Razor) . The simplest answer , meaning with the fewest entities and causal processes is statistically the most likely. There could be a million and one factors that created the perfect storm that produced the super hb getting ugly poor nerd or that there is a perfect storm of events every time he approaches one. However, scientifically it’s more likely that that individual , consciously or unconsciously mind you, has a specific set of basic mannerisms that trigger a positive psychological response in the opposite sex. Reply admin says: November 2, 2011 at 3:15 pm First of all, you committed the most common mistake above: “social aptitude, psychology, or pua is really just arguing semantics” No, it is not ! “Seduction” has a very specific meaning – i.e. it is the belief that men can “create” attraction in women’s heads (see the definition of seduction cited on my website) . CREATE . That’s not only basic psychology. That’s a completely different claim. https://md.rappet.xyz/s/dnDMq79dM https://md.picasoft.net/s/ekEcTxd6r https://pad.koeln.ccc.de/s/jLG5Y-pjM https://pad.p2p.legal/s/Q6mLlrxmn https://codimd.avt-imt.de/s/FCzBN1hyg https://codimd.data-futures.org/s/2y3jR3iDfj https://codimd.mim-libre.fr/s/dDLy3AzXZ https://craigslist-personals.startring.nl/ https://craigslist-personals.linkupdate.nl/ https://craigslist-personals.webmastercity.nl/ https://craigslist-personals.azula.nl/ https://craigslist-personals.dutchindex.nl/ https://craigslist-personals.sellerconnect.de/ https://craigslist-personals.knaps.be/ https://craigslist-personals.hmcz.nl/